Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.19 seconds)
Ms. Shobha Devi vs Union Of India Thru. General Manager, ... on 13 May, 2024 cites

Gaurav Kapoor & Ors. vs Union Of India on 18 February, 2014

10. So far as the judgment relied by the learned counsel for the appellant in the case of Gaurav Kapoor and Others Vs. Union of India; FAO No.401 of 2010 is concerned, it was admitted position in the said case that deceased had a valid train ticket, which was for travel from New Delhi Railway Station to Ludhiana, therefore, the court held that it can not be said that the deceased was a totally unauthorized passenger though he had boarded a wrong train from the New Delhi Railway Station and had fallen barely about 2/3 kms from New Delhi Railway Station. Thus, the High Court has recorded a finding that once the deceased had a valid journey ticket, albeit for travel from New Delhi to Ludhiana, the deceased is a bonafide passenger within the Explanation (ii) to Section 124-A and he has been held a bonafide passenger and accordingly the appeal was allowed and the matter was remitted. This case is distinguishable on the facts and circumstances of the present case and does not of any benefit to the appellant. In this case no valid ticket has been found with the appellant and learned tribunal has also recorded a finding that it can not be said that the ticket was lost by the appellant and nothing has been argued or shown which may show that the said finding is perverse or erroneous.
Delhi High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 3 - V J Mehta - Full Document

Kalandi Charan Sahoo vs General Manager, South-East Central ... on 25 April, 2017

12. After the aforesaid judgment was dictated, learned counsel for the appellant relying on the judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of Vikrant and Others Vs. Union of India; 2022/DHC/004320 (FAO499/2017) and Kalindi Charan Sahoo and Another Vs. General Manager, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur; (2019) 12 SCC 387 submits that once the inquiry was made much after the incident had taken place and after filing of the claim petition, it can not be relied by the tribunal. However, these judgments are also of not any help to the appellant because the appellant has failed to prove his case and it does not seem to be the case of the appellant before the tribunal, therefore the contention of learned counsel for the appellant is misconceived and not tenable.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 2 - Cited by 43 - Full Document

Vikrant Katoch & Ors. Etc. vs Union Of India & Ors. Etc. on 1 December, 2015

12. After the aforesaid judgment was dictated, learned counsel for the appellant relying on the judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of Vikrant and Others Vs. Union of India; 2022/DHC/004320 (FAO499/2017) and Kalindi Charan Sahoo and Another Vs. General Manager, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur; (2019) 12 SCC 387 submits that once the inquiry was made much after the incident had taken place and after filing of the claim petition, it can not be relied by the tribunal. However, these judgments are also of not any help to the appellant because the appellant has failed to prove his case and it does not seem to be the case of the appellant before the tribunal, therefore the contention of learned counsel for the appellant is misconceived and not tenable.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1